The Slav Dilemma

My repertoire has been evolving for a while now, and I generally enjoy the positions I get with both white and black...there are always holes, side-lines, and places to improve, but - generally - I feel like I'm equal or better out of almost every opening.

But the Slav and its cousins keep giving me trouble....black has transpositional tricks, so I feel like I'm virtually forced to enter some crazy, do-or-die position or something so monstrously boring that I want to cry myself to sleep.

I'm interested in side lines, instructive games, and ideas....but we can also commiserate on the fact that the Slav has been nigh unbreakable for 150 years

Traditional Slav:

Semi-Slav:

The two evasive lines:

The specific lines you gave aren't the best.

However, I agree with you that the Slav is a tricky opening. You could try the Slow Slav:

Or, this line of the Exchange Slav (more interesting than the line you gave):

It's worth playing Nc3 first to avoid this gambit:

3.Nc3 does not avoid the gambit.  3.Nf3 does.

After 3.Nc3, Black has the Winawer Counter-Gambit - 3...e5

That's a different gambit... Why avoid the Winawer Counter-Gambit, which is supposed to be not fully sound? The specific line in the Exchange Slav is avoided by first playing 3.Nc3, while 3.Nf3 forces a different line in which white is committed to an early Nf3, which is the line that the OP was complaining about.

@ThrillerFan https://www.chesspublishing.com/content/7/dec14.htm

I am also interested in this. I have been playing the exchange as rrecommemdedby dzindizshavili (or soemthing like that) in one video. I also recently bought a d4 repertoire that recommends to take it all and go for the meran, but i happen to have a life. Maybe i should play exchange bf4 as recommended by dreev in the chess strars book. Any suggestions?

The Slow Slav, 3.Sf3 and 4.e3, is a good option in my view. If you're not able to devote the time required to play the most topical (and let's face it, most of us are better off focusing on other parts of our game than learning 35 moves in the Botvinnik Variation), go for something less theoretical. The Slow Slav doesn't lack bite, and you'll come across players who don't really pay attention to the move order and transpose to the Semi-Slav with 3...e6 which means that White can develop the queen's knight to d2, play b3 and Bb2, plonk the knight on e5 and then follow up by f4 and Qf3 or Ndf3.

I'll look at the 4.e3 lines as they seem to come highly recommended (I also have Watson's book - which suggests it)

In the meantime, I was looking through Karpov for inspiration against the Slav and found THIS ridiculous beast....so many sharp sidelines!

Maybe we're approaching from the wrong direction. Who are the greatest Slav experts in history? I'll look up what they have to say about the position.

Thanks @my137thaccount. That is a cool website.

OP... Be patient. One of the NMs or IMs would give their opinions soon.

I think the difference between AlisonHart and GM Timur Gareyev is that only one of you enjoy jumping out of airplanes.

From Gareev, I learned that you don't have to win to be a Grandmaster....and I took it to heart; I never win

I'm a Slav lover as Black and chess.com's Opening Explorer says I have 62% wins, 31% losses, and 7% draws. I also love it's 1 e4 cousin, the Caro-Kann.

In these openings I don't like the variations where White plays cxd5 because it usually results in an open game and the reason I like these openings is that I'm stronger positionally and strategically than most of my opponents, so an opening where a lot of easy tactics aren't available gives me an edge.

That is probably why many who play the Slav like it.  So it makes sense that opening up, not closing up the game is the way to go.

Morozevich - as ever - offers us imagination

AlphaZero's choice:

1. d4 d5  2. c4 c6  3. Nc3 Nf6  4. Nf3 a6  5. g3 dxc4  6. a4

If you are going to develop the rook in h3 you might as well adapt sirovs plan of g4 and Rg1 and see what happens.

It's always risky to adopt lines which require the imagination of a Chigorin, a Jobava, a Morozevich, an Ivanchuk or a Nezhmetdinov! They can play lines which are slightly dodgy because they're so creative that they often overwhelm their opponents.

I'm not thinking of adopting that line, but - looking into any position - I always want to know "what does Moro do here?"......it turns out, Moro views the Slav as a straight pawn sacrifice, and he uses black's materialism (c6, b5, a6) to play on dark squares and attack on the kingside.

I have no idea what my practical ELO is....haven't played a USCF game in 4 years (was 1350 last i checked?), I'm 1600 on lichess, 1450 here, 650 in bullet, and - yes - 1100ish in live blitz. 

So if you want to call that 1100, I guess that's OK....but I'm not an e4 player, thanks.